What Engineering Teams Have Found Useful

The Guidance Library filled a gap we kept running into. We were spending too much time triangulating between vendor documentation and third-party comparisons. Having it structured around the deployment decision itself — rather than the hardware vendor's preferred framing — made it much more usable.

We used the Planning Workshop before finalising our serving infrastructure for a mid-size transformer model. The session pushed us to think through the batch size and latency tradeoff more carefully than we had — the written summary became a reference document for the team. The workshop format was efficient; it didn't drag.

The quarterly updates are the feature we didn't know we needed. The articles from our initial subscription are still accurate on the fundamentals, but the update from Q1 this year pointed out some changes in how certain accelerator categories handle quantised models that were directly relevant to a project we had running.

We commissioned a Custom Engagement when we were consolidating two separate serving pipelines. The discovery session surfaced that we'd framed the problem in a way that was making it look harder than it needed to be. The written guide that came out of it was well-scoped and directly actionable. Delivery was on time.

I was sceptical that a guidance library could add much to what's already available online. But the structure is the thing — the way it maps hardware decisions to model requirements gives you a usable framework rather than a pile of specs to interpret. Worth the subscription for that alone.

The Planning Workshop was useful for our team partly because it brought together engineers who had different assumptions about what our hardware constraints actually were. Working through the framework together surfaced those gaps before we got to procurement. The facilitation didn't feel scripted.